- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
DONOVAN et ux. v. PHILA. PARK. AUTH
Negligence — Possessor of premises — Door — Evidence.
In a trespass action, in which it appeared that wife plaintiff, a business invitee on defendant's premises, who was injured when she opened a door, testified that the door was quite heavy and was sort of stuck, that she placed her hand on the handle but the door did not open, that she applied a little more pressure, and as the door swung back, it cut over two toes, that the door was sharp, and that when she was treated by a doctor three or four slivers of metal were removed by the doctor; and that the court below, holding that the evidence showed no breach of a duty owed by defendant, entered a compulsory nonsuit; it was Held that the order of the court below should be affirmed.
Argued June 15, 1961.
OPINION PER CURIAM, September 12, 1961:
The order of the Municipal Court of Philadelphia County is affirmed on the opinion of Judge FELIX PIEKARSKI for the court below, reported at 24 Pa. D. C. 2d 686.
Alert